Circular Systems

[Josh Evanz]

Please find below concept of a circular system. Im curious about hypothetical solutions for this hypothetical sound system. How would others approach this if its a simple DJ system with a couple of stereo inputs no live microphones? What spatial tools would others use and how would you drive the rig? Stereo, Stereo alternate? Mono? Other? What blemishes are shown below that cause concern for others? Another question might be what to do about the subwoofers or lack there of.

As a friend would say, cuss n discuss-

Thanks in advance,

Josh

 

[Josh Evanz]

 

[Josh Evanz]

Above are some more print screens with some sketch notes.

The easiest option is a simple stereo send of two mono signals. So one would take a mono feed for the line arrays and then another mono feed for the loudspeakers above. Left equal a lateral localization while right would equal a vertical localization.

More complex would be something similar but mono for the tops and an alternating left, right, left stereo field for the line arrays and front fills.

The next more complicated version would be to use the spatial tools to build stereo mixes and virtual microphones using each array as a node allocated from the different (immersive/spatial) devices.

Should the lighting get their own scaffold build or do they get the top deck of a small scaffold build much like a multi story building shared with others?

Any thoughts on how to create a monitoring tool so that one hears from mix in 3d what the mix sounds like on the floor?

J-

 

[Paul Johnson]

Is this crazy project some kind of bizarre college thing? Anyway, confirm something please. In the plan view the speakers are facing out of a circle, so the audience are outside that circle, like maybe in a football stadium with centre stage in the middle of the pitch? In the other drawings they all face one way. One way is viable, and has been done for years, albeit with fewer hangs than yours. Audio in the round is conventionally mono because left and right has no meaning. One persons right is someones else’s right. Theatre in the round has had this question floated for years. Localisation of things like sound effects works when audiences are close in as angles change over greater ranges. With a stadium size install, left to right moves of just a few degrees are too small for effect, so it’s mono. If your speakers do all face the same way, rather than out, it will be a spectacular mess. Dozens of sources with multiples covering every area. Scale is tricky in your plans, but nobody will get a single path to a speaker, so I can’t see any way for delays to align. If the area is football pitch scaled, then if you made sure each area was only covered from one source, or had considerable volume from one source and much less from the adjacent ones it could work. If the audience all can visually see the face of each hang, you are sunk.

always best to detail your context. Is this real? It seems to mean indoors, or else hanging will be a killer, and indoors with reflections …… what on earth is the point?

 

[Josh Evanz]

Thanks Paul,
Well yes I suppose college kids would have fun, but no im not in college. Its one of many many many concepts ill be exploring. Im tired of traditional sound systems. The larger arrays are facing inwards and the front fills are facing outwards. Picture attached below. The scale size would be 200' Diameter circle and then each array is spaced by 30' (feet) or 28-30 ms apart. 30ms was chosen which also happens to be about one array per 15 degrees because when spacing traditional stereo left right arrays any farther then the sound goes from stereo to audible echoes.

Rigging a system like this is easy almost Childs play. Flown, ground stacked, indoors or out it doesn't matter, as long as the "air hooks" have been certified recently. That's a joke bty. Not the system, but the air hooks comment.

 

[Carl Klinkenborg]

Im tired of traditional sound systems.

Which particular aspects of them, and for what reason? Further, is there one area of traditional systems that is your main focus of interest/improvement?

 

[Josh Evanz]

Below are some spatial options I came up with. I stoped at 20 as it's a good number in audio. The red circle is a left channel and the purple is the right channel with two duplications and then one makes it spin by moving the signal from array to array.

 

[Josh Evanz]

Which particular aspects of them, and for what reason? Further, is there one area of traditional systems that is your main focus of interest/improvement?

Main focus,
Improvement of speech intelligibility
Spatialization
Managing ones LEQ
Creating new engaging systems
New response approaches to emergency situ

What im tired of is standing in front of a giant PA system that largely remains the same. In short they're all just big giant dumb boxes of sound. One spends lots of time designing them, setting them up only to hand a system over to a FOH engineer who either mixes or manages playback tracks. All to often does one spend all there time at sound check just to get things sounding as best they can only to stand back from the desk during a concert as all the acoustical management and mix work is largely done. Sound systems don't have to be so static there are simple methods to make environments more engaging.

Maybe and I say maybe, there is a planned SPL strategy for opening act vs headlining act and maybe the subs would be adjusted or maybe a high or low pass filter. Or maybe one manages the HF response as humidity changes depending on the environment from sun up to sunset.

The system im showing isn't that big. Its 192 line array cabinets with 24 locations. 18 channels for the inner circle and 21 channels for the tops. Pretty small for the newer system processors Dante etc. 231 channels not including monitors, ancillary and subs.

 

[Josh Evanz]

Hopefully this old school forums technology will accept the html link and play a video from you tube.

This was done using the good ole classic 2d spatial panner using multiple mono sources as sys doesn't do spatial banners with stereo sources. Other options of accomplishing the same thing, maybe better would be from the larger companies like Meyer Space maps or the new Compass Go, I think some of the others could do this as well. I did something similar with a quad system using Space Maps with Level Control Systems but that was looong ago. The video shows poor placement of nodes/objects much like programming a circle for an old school Techno-Beam (best moving light fixture ever!)

 

[Josh Evanz]

yet another option

 

[Josh Evanz]

Added, subs and some audience area concepts and a Stanley Bear, just to make it look cool ;-)

Current sub option is 10 vertically stacked subs. Total of 80 15" drivers. Sub array is inspired by an old Typhany servo concept.

 

[Paul Johnson]

Josh. You are bombarding us with pictures and comments but I suspect we are totally confused. A quick inventory list shows the costs of this are crazy, and you’ve never explained where the audience even is. So many stadium size shows are mono totally because stereo is just unworkable in any meaningful way. What on earth are you trying to do. I’ve lost the plot totally.

I did a few shows working in in arenas with quad audio, and it’s sounded awful. Nobody had a perfect seat. You want to play music, no live mics with 250 to half a million worth of hanging audio. This cannot be real?

 

[Josh Evanz]

Hi Paul, thanks for checking out the pics. The audience area is in the center of the circle. Each array covers one half of the circle with coverage stopping either just before FOH in the middle or depending on the array extending past foh (not advised).

One of many spatial panning options (I attached a potential list). But, one would be no more than four sources or two pairs of stereo that pan circular from array to array. That's just one option of many. The yoga tunnel is a separate concept. Apologies as it looks like I got carried away. Imagine a rear fire stereo source that pans in a rotal/circular fashion.

Feedback might be a concern but I got that covered and can mitigate that just fine. It's the spatial panning that's complex. It might look expensive and is if one were to use expensive boxes. Likely some of the plastic fantastic line arrays would work. JBL VRX dB Technologies etc. Rigging and power is the main expense I would think.

One would need about 29 network break out boxes one cat five at each array and a Prodigy DSP would get the job done just fine.

J-

 

[Paul Johnson]

Well - I'm a bit insulted now. I have a 12 box VRX system, and it's not alone array and it's not a plastic fantastic either. Cost, about 20K - multiply that up and this is plain silly. Stereo as a concept is dead in the water with multiple sources messing up the time alignment. Everybody would be hearing so made sources that stereo would just be a mess, and even if you could align it to work for one small group of people what about the rest? If on the other hand you want to do multi track playback of dance music, then for effect it might work, with all the component sounds coming from different places, but even then, how would you sync snap hits up so the don't stutter for everyone? You still didn't explain what it is you are trying to do? all we have are random plans, and if your budget thinks JBL VRX and d&b are 'would do' products, you're in a way different world to me. The funding to enable this would be crazy, AND, it would sound terrible.

 

[Josh Evanz]

Im a speaker geek and im pretty familiar with the VRX 900. Legit, it’s a historical box and has a long list of accomplishments. You being offended is ur issue not mine. Regardless you likely made the right purchasing decision. Maybe not for the same reasons id pick that box. In all seriousness me selecting and choosing that box as an example and comparing it to D&B is a compliment. In reality one could do this attached project with point source or any number of line array boxes.

If you have 12 boxes, then you could easily do this rig, the circular aspect would be the same, the coverage and output would not be.

Regarding Stereo, Im not sure I know anything about ur background. But, alternating left, right, left has worked for maybe 50-60 years. You cant say things like (stereo wont work or it would sound terrible) especially if one hasn’t done it, or spent decades in the prediction world.

Question:
What Is the farthest distance one can place two loudspeakers and still have a stereo field?
What is the closest distance?

Sorry Paul, but you dont sound (pun intended) to be very open to anything different. There is nothing wrong with “Plastic Fantastic” or what others call “tupper wear boxes”.

Now if you came back with something such as, reduce the sources from 29 to say 8 or 10 or 12 or 20 because of the stereo coverage or the initial time gap between sources and you predicted it that would be one thing. Which is actually what I was hopeing to hear from others. Rather, the comment of that just wont work.

The future is in surround and various creative versions of surround audio.

Maybe ill just do a review on the VRX,

First with multiple cup pole mounts (literally revolutionary)-
Most efficient 12” line array and most cost efficient only comparable maybe to a Nexo single 12”-
Horrible at crossover but who cares-
Great fly hardware-
Professional options such as case covers, EASE data, actually specifications-
Reasonable speech-
Small medium and large options, with compatible rigging if I recall-
Cross country rentals, one cant sling a dead cat without hitting at least a dozen rental companies-

_____________________________________________________________________________

”What? Giant LEDs screens the length of a football field, that would never work and be too expensive let along a video dance board”

Let’s allow a little room for creativity on the forums and internet. Please? Im kinda sad, twenty years ago this would have been chewed up by allot of folks Good and bad. Seems Facebook really did bulldoze over the internet. Bonus option, name as many 12” line array boxes that are comparable to the VRX. Only include brands that have in the past atleast 20 years done demos at tradeshows, not including fake Chinese or Brazil line arrays.

I will say, thanks Paul for ur comments, and apologies if you are offended. The VRX is a great box and id happily mix on it and have in the past.

 

[Josh Evanz]

well crap, just as I tried to compliment the good ole VRX900 on supporting pro specs, no f-ing EASE data..... What the crap?

I downloaded the DLL rev 1.5.3 and it's not a dll ;-( and no case data. Just Bloody Loud indeed-

 

[Paul Johnson]

Not offended in any sensible way - but If when you say I'm not open to anything different, you mean weird stuff, I'm quite OK with that - but stereo field, or possible extension to 4 channel is OK, but stereo field collapses once multiple sources combine. What I mean is that if you do an in the round presentation, and I've worked in both music and acting in the round productions for a very long time - First I think probably 76 - stereo as in a sound field with close eyes locational info goes horrible wrong once L becomes R and R becomes L, as not does in a simple 4 speakers at 90 degrees around the circle. One person's right is somebody else's left and so on, and while for effect it works - so having an instrument in one and not in the next is valid. It's not stereo though. Multiple speakers, in my humble view are not capable of creating a conventional stereo field.

In the absence of any request context, or explanation, I'll leave you to it. I was mystified when you said I could do this with my system? So your drawings with many hanging flown arrays are not what you are planning? I suppose I could indeed put 8 in a circle facing out, and if I use each one separately, I could send anything to anywhere in the circle - but what would the point be. In 1996 or maybe 97 I remember Phil collins doing an in the round show, and remember clearly it being virtually mono. The drums were definitely panned though so the tom fills and things like that were definitely moving, but I remember thinking they were reversed left to right. never thought more about it till now. One bit had the people on stage going around in a circle and I don't think that was in the PA?

 

[Art Welter]

Question:
What Is the farthest distance one can place two loudspeakers and still have a stereo field?
What is the closest distance?

Bob McCarthy answered those questions :
https://bobmccarthy.com/the-emperors-new-stereo/

"We locate the image depending on which source arrives first to our ears, even if the time difference is minimal and the later source has more intensity. The psychoacoustic relation between these two factors is known as ”Precedence effect” and was analyzed in 1950, among others, by the now famous Dr. Helmut Haas.

The ”sweet spot” for binaural localization (stereo imaging) is within the first millisecond of time difference. If the time difference exceeds the 5 milliseconds, the sound image can only be moved by brute force. The channel that arrives last must be 10 dB louder than the first to achieve this.

Now this is where the scale concept really comes alive.

Time and intensity differences don’t translate equally when we scale from a small space to a large one.

The intensity difference is a proportion between the level of both sources (the two speakers, the two channels…). The intensity relationship between left and right channel is the same in your living room than in a stadium. If you’re standing at twice the distance from one speaker in reference to the other, the intensity difference will be 6 dB, This will remain the same, no matter if the difference is 1.5 and 3 meters, or 15 and 30 meters.

The time difference, however, is not a proportion. It is simply, the DIFFERENCE in the arrival time of both sources.

While the intensity difference was kept constant in the previous example, the time difference will be multiplied by 10 when we increase the distance from 1.5 (4.4 ms approx.) to 15 meters (44 ms).

Given that the time difference is the predominating factor in sound location, you can clearly see that the odds are low when you’re trying to achieve stereo in large scale.

Because we only have a 5 ms window to control the image, the usable space to recreate stereo in a stadium is, in proportion, really small compared to your living room. In other words, the horizontal area needed to experience true stereo localization (the space where the images can be situated) is barely larger in a stadium than it is in your living room."

 

[Josh Evanz]

Thanks Art, Love 606 but he's just pointing out the work of others. The Haas effect helps us understand allot of things including stereo. I think the ITD displayed in EASE is a little more useful. In short yes one localizes to the first arrival regardless of intensity or magnitude (in theory). But if you walk in with a loaded gun it will definitely be the loudest source in the room regardless. Sorry for the tangent. The answer or at least my answer is 30' or 30 ms which past that distance or time the arrivals become echos rather stereo sources. That's for the longest offset. The shortest offset is zero meaning IEM, headphones or very close stereo sources. Im attaching some drawings. In the circular outer ITD prediction the max time is 28ms shown in green and the yellow I believe is less than 10ms. Adding a spatial panner makes the stereo effect cover the entire audience and also potentially creates movement in the audience for EDM/Mosh pits etc or maybe a waltz.

 

[Paul Johnson]

ah - detail at last. You don't mean stereo, you mean effects. We get it now. Left-right or right-left doesn't matter if you want movement, spacial activity and mosh pits. Suddenly all your drawings and stuff make sense. If that's what you want just think what you could do with 8 or 16 outs and automated fader moves. Synth part from every speaker, alternate bass from different places, multiple voices, chorus effects, arpeggiators on synths. Alternate note from speakers metres apart. Crazy stuff.

Probably fall flat on rock and roll, and probably not on the circular Coronation stage.